ridiculous dry apers (Re: MV is the most published author of SAP

From: Marc Verhaegen (fa204466_at_skynet.be)
Date: 12/23/04 

Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 13:13:05 +0100

"Algis Kuliukas" <algis@RiverApes.com> wrote in message
news:1103777377.989848.138430@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...

...

> You're also wrong to say Marc had no provocation.

Of course, he's wrong, the fool. Well, the very first time when I got into
SAP (IOW, before ever posting anything here!), 5 or more years ago, that
very day, I saw my name mentioned by some dry aper who believed that the
famous passage was wrong: "In a Neandertal swimming on his back, the large
nose with distal nostrils and the protruding midface surrounded by large air
sinuses functioned as a snorkel." (from one of my Med.Hyp.papers, can be
found in the files of http://www.onelist.com/community/AAT ). I knew this
passage would elicit reactions, but since I like some controversion & try to
write as concise as possible, I didn't change it. The dry apers are
incredibly stupid here: a child can see that if a neandertal with a
protruding nose (Zollikofer hadn't yet published on neandertal noses then)
floated on his back, his nose worked as a snorkel. Only idiots (as we find
many of them here) deny this. Whether or not neandertals really did this
frequently, I don't know, but for some obscure reason (read: lack of
intelligence) dry apers think they have to laugh at it, although they're
still unable, after so many years, to give 1 argument against the
hypothesis. I can't describe their behaviour in other words than
unscientific biasedness. The same with all my other hypotheses. I don't care
whether my hypotheses are wrong, but if somebody believes they're wrong, he
should at least be able to give some arguments...

:-D

--Marc
_______

Stone walling every
> pro-AAH argument in the way you have done for YEARS is incredibly
> frustrating. As you know only too well yourself, one's patience has a
> tendency to snap eventually. Marc's snapped a long time ago. I
> sympathise with that but still don't condone his readiness to call
> people idiots. But even there, people have called Marc far worse than
> 'idiots' and 'fools' for YEARS too. You just pretend that fact away
> though in your attempt to vilify and de-humanise someone who's only
> crime is to understand that human evolution was clearly greatly
> influenced by water and get very frustrated that so-called experts have
> argued themselves into such a corner on this that they would rather
> argue that black is white than admit they had made a monumental and
> fundamental mistake.
>
> > B) You idolize an *** who hasn't shown a hint of standard
> courtesy for
> > a number of years. You idolize someone who has what goes far beyond
> habit
> > of attacking a range of posters. Is his modal abuse as nasty as I
> got?
> > No, but the prick spent years earning his due.
> >
> > Do note what kind of company you keep with Marc. You pick your idols
>
> > poorly.
>
> Now if I'd have written that you'd have lectured me about not having
> the presumption to decide what you think. I do not 'idolise' him, nor
> do I suggest that he is a sub-human piece of ***. Some of us are able
> to hold more moderate positions.
>
> I'm really only replying to this to remind everyone that Jason is
> clearly in absolutely no mood for an apology on calling a fellow
> newsgroup poster the lowest kind of insult possible.
>
> I'm going to end this by getting back on thread. MV might be the most
> published author on SAP, and I suspect he has called others idiots or
> fools far more often than anyone else but Jason Eshleman must be the
> number one canditate for the most abusive poster on this newsgroup.
>
> And with that, I have nothing more to say about name calling. Can we
> please get back to debating human evolution?
>
> Algis Kuliukas
>